« american classic by accident? | Main | SATIRE »

February 11, 2007

Wordsworth, you are the man.

"As Wordsworth put it, a poet is a man speaking to men. On the whole, we listen to those who address us in order to discover what they mean. It is also true that, in rare and memorable instances, people say remarkable things without meaning them" (31).

To start off, I read this aloud to Lorin. As I read, "a poet is a man speaking to men", she looked at me as if I was lying and reading the context correctly. "Oh, well that is profound," Lorin said with a satric tone. HAHA.

Another thing, umm, Wordsworth is sexist. Does he only think that men read poetry? I think more women do because of the sappy, romantic view of most poems.
I was just kidding about the sexist comment; I am not a feminist.

Okay, back to my quote. As I read this line, I thought to myself that Wordsworth was pointing out a great argument. I do think that poets write lines down without ever realizing what remarkable poetry they are creating. When Wordsworth pointed out we as humans listen to those who address us without knowing what words will come out of their mouth, that we take in what they said to discover what exactly they are trying to point out.

Along with the mistake of remarkable poetry written, according to Wordsworth, another line that is along the lines of the previous one is:
"What is involved here, at its widest extent, is the momentous issue whether literature is primarily to be studied as a purposive activity or not. It was among the greatest achievements of nineteenth-century historiography to emphasize, perhaps even exaggerate, the sense of purpose out of which a great poem is born" (30).

With this purposive activity, we then begin to look deeper into the author's intention. But what if the poet was just writing words down and then eventually became popular, we would then have to begin with the possible, then the probable and finally the likely which then makes the reader look into the history of the time period and/or the author.

Round and round we go; where this author intention stuff stops, we will never know!!!

Posted by Denamarie at February 11, 2007 9:05 PM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:


The only thing I can tell you about the text's regulation to representing one gender is to look at the publication date of the article (on the title page of the article, under the synopsis Keesey gives). When I realize a writer referring to only one gender, I look at when it was published to get an idea of why. Glad this doesn't affect how you read the text.

As for not meaning to write such brilliant lines? I'm sure it's happened, but, in my opinion, even the most humble poets want their work to be amazing.

Posted by: Karissa at February 12, 2007 7:40 AM

Post a comment

Remember Me?